Water footprint of wheat at the field scale as a function of the number of irrigation events
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.19136/era.a13nVI.5292Keywords:
Soil water balance, crop evapotranspiration, CROPWAT, IRRIMODELAbstract
The Water Footprint (WF) is a key tool for investigating the sustainability of agricultural production in terms of water use. In particular, the WF of crops has been widely accepted as a comprehensive indicator of agricultural water consumption; however, accurate quantification of the WF is a prerequisite for implementing WF assessments that promote sustainable regional water management. This study aims to estimate the water footprint (WF) of wheat cultivation using the field soil water balance (BAS) approach under different irrigation management strategies, with the goal of identifying the strategy that minimizes the WF and promotes more efficient water use in the study area. Three sites were evaluated with three irrigation treatments: four irrigations (4A), three irrigations (3A), and two irrigations (2A); additionally, the applicability of the IRRIMODEL model was evaluated as an alternative for estimating crop evapotranspiration (ETc) in WF studies, using estimates obtained with CROPWAT as a reference. The results indicate that the estimated consumption WF for wheat ranges from 414 to 695 m3 t-1 for the 2022–2023 agricultural year, with the 3A treatment yielding the lowest average WFconsumption and the highest yield; furthermore, IRRIMODEL proved to be a viable alternative with great potential for monitoring HH at the plot and regional scales, showing differences generally less than 15% in the estimation of WFconsumption compared to CROPWAT.
Downloads
References
Allen RG, Pereira LS, Howell TA, Jensen ME (2011) Evapotranspiration information reporting: I. Factors governing measurement accuracy. Agricultural Water Management 98(6): 899-920. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2010.12.015
Allen RG, Pereira LS, Raes D, Smith M (1998) Crop evapotranspiration - Guidelines for computing crop water requirements. FAO Irrigation and drainage paper 56. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy. 300p.
Castañeda-Ibáñez CR, Flores-Magdaleno H, Martínez-Menes M, Esparza-Govea S, Fernández-Reynoso D, Prado-Hernández V, Pascual-Ramírez F (2018) Estimación de la evapotranspiración mediante un balance de energía utilizando sensores remotos. Ecosistemas y Recursos Agropecuarios 5(15):537-545. https://doi.org/10.19136/era.a5n15.1647
CESAVE - SIAFESON (2023) Red de estaciones meteorológicas automatizadas de Sonora. https://remas.siafeson.org.mx/. Fecha de consulta: 31 julio de 2023.
Chattaraj S, Chakraborty D, Sehgal VK, Paul RK, Singh SD, Daripa A, Pathak H (2014) Predicting the impact of climate change on water requirement of wheat in the semi-arid Indo-Gangetic Plains of India. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 197: 174-183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2014.07.023
Chukalla AD, Krol MS, Hoekstra AY (2015) Green and blue water footprint reduction in irrigated agriculture: Effect of irrigation techniques, irrigation strategies and mulching. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences 19(12): 4877-4891. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-19-4877-2015
Elbeltagi A, Deng J, Wang K, Hong Y (2020) Crop water footprint estimation and modeling using an artificial neural network approach in the Nile Delta, Egypt. Agricultural Water Management 235: 106080. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2020.106080
Ercoli L, Arduini I, Mariotti M, Masoni A (2010) Post-anthesis dry matter and nitrogen dynamics in durum wheat as affected by nitrogen and temperature during grain filling. Cereal Research Communications 38(2):294-303. https://doi.org/10.1556/crc.38.2010.2.16
FAO (2012) Coping with water scarcity An action framework for agriculture and food security. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. 100p. https://www.fao.org/4/i3015e/i3015e.pdf. Fecha de consulta: 27 de enero del 2026.
Farell C, Turpin S, Suppen N (2011) Assessment of the water footprint of wheat in Mexico. In: Finkbeiner M (ed) Towards life cycle sustainability management. Springer. pp. 161-170. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1899-9_16
Feng B, Zhuo L, Xie D, Mao Y, Gao J, Xie P, Wu P (2021) A quantitative review of water footprint accounting and simulation for crop production based on publications during 2002-2018. Ecological Indicators 120: 106962. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.106962
Flores Lopez LI, Bautista-Capetillo C (2015) Green and blue water footprint accounting for dry beans (Phaseolus vulgaris) in primary region of Mexico. Sustainability 7(3): 3001-3016. https://doi.org/10.3390/su7033001
Garay ÁS, Ramón J, Alcalá V, Hernández J, Fermín O, Romero S (2022) Estimación de la huella hídrica de la producción de caña de azúcar para los ingenios de la cuenca del Papaloapan. Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Agrícolas 13(1): 103-113. https://doi.org/10.29312/REMEXCA.V13I1.2581
Gómez-Tagle AF, Gómez-Tagle A, Fuerte-Velázquez DJ, Barajas-Alcalá AG, Quiroz-Rivera F, Alarcón-Chaires PE, Guerrero-García-Rojas H (2022) Blue and green water footprint of agro-industrial avocado production in Central Mexico. Sustainability 14(15): 9664. https://doi.org/10.3390/SU14159664/S1
Hoekstra AY, Chapagain AK, Aldaya MM, Mekonnen MM (2011) Manual de evaluación de la huella hídrica:Establecimiento del estándar mundial. Aenor. Madrid, España. 244p.
Huang J, Xu C, Ridoutt BG, Chen F (2015) Reducing agricultural water footprints at the farm scale: A case study in the Beijing region. Water 7(12): 7066-7077. https://doi.org/10.3390/w7126674
INIFAP (2017) Agenda Técnica Agrícola de Sonora. Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Forestales, Agrícolas y Pecuarias. Ciudad de México, México. 302p. https://vun.inifap.gob.mx/VUN_MEDIA/BibliotecaWeb/_media/_agendas/4143_4840_Agenda_T%c3%a9cnica_Sonora_2017.pdf. Fecha de consulta: 27 de enero de 2026.
Karandish F, Šimůnek J (2019) A comparison of the HYDRUS (2D/3D) and SALTMED models to investigate the influence of various water-saving irrigation strategies on the maize water footprint. Agricultural Water Management 213: 809-820. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2018.11.023
Koradia A, Yadav B, Pandey A, Chowdary VM, Chandrasekar K (2025) Crop water footprint assessment: A review of methodological Approaches, scale Variability, and data constraints. Water Resources Management 39(14): 7361-7384. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-025-04323-2
Li Z, Feng B, Wang W, Yang X, Wu P, Zhuo L (2022) Spatial and temporal sensitivity of water footprint assessment in crop production to modelling inputs and parameters. Agricultural Water Management 271: 107805. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2022.107805
Ma Y, Sun S, Li C, Zhao J, Li Z, Jia C (2023) Estimation of regional actual evapotranspiration based on the improved SEBAL model. Journal of Hydrology 619:129283. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2023.129283
Mekonnen MM, Hoekstra AY (2010) A global and high-resolution assessment of the green, blue and grey water footprint of wheat. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences 14(7): 1259-1276. https://doi.org/10.5194/HESS-14-1259-2010
Mekonnen MM, Hoekstra AY (2011) The green, blue and grey water footprint of crops and derived crop products. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences 15 (5):1577-1600. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-15-1577-2011
Mendoza-Pérez C, Ojeda-Bustamante W, Sifuentes-Ibarra E, Quevedo-Nolasco A, Flores-Magdaleno H, Ramírez-Ayala C, Ascencio-Hernández R (2019) Estimación de la evapotranspiración de referencia mediante atmómetro con fines de calendarización de riego. Idesia (Arica) 37(4): 65-72. http://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0718-34292019000400065
Mendoza-Pérez C, Sifuentes-Ibarra E, Macías-Cervantes J, Ramírez-Ayala C, Flores-Magdaleno H (2018) Uso de programa IRRIMODEL para la programación de riego por goteo en el cultivo de maíz (Zea mays L.). Agro Productividad 11(1): 49-55. https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.352816
Molden D, Oweis T, Steduto P, Bindraban P, Hanjra MA, Kijne J (2010) Improving agricultural water productivity: Between optimism and caution. Agricultural Water Management 97(4): 528-535. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2009.03.023
Ojeda-Bustamante W, Sifuentes-Ibarra E, Unland-Weiss H (2006) Programación intergral del riego en Maíz en el Norte de Sinaloa, México. Agrociencia 40(1): 13-25.
Palacios-Vélez E, Palacios-Sánchez JE, Palacios-Sánchez L A (2011) Agricultura de riego asistida con satélites. Tecnología y Ciencias del Agua 2(2): 69-82.
Pask A, Pietragalla J, Mullan DM, Chávez-Dulanto PN, Reynolds MP (2013) Fitomejoramiento fisiológico II: Una guía de campo para la caracterización fenotípica de trigo. CIMMYT. México.140p.
Peñaloza-Sánchez AM, Bustamante-González Á, Vargas-López S, Jaramillo-Villanueva JL, Quevedo-Nolasco A (2020) Water footprint of onion (Allium cepa L.) and husk tomato (Physalis ixocarpa Brot.) crops in the region of Atlixco, Puebla, Mexico. Tecnología y Ciencias del Agua 11(5): 1-30. https://doi.org/10.24850/J-TYCA-2020-05-01
Pereira LS, Allen RG, Smith M, Raes D (2015) Crop evapotranspiration estimation with FAO56: Past and future. Agricultural Water Management 147: 4-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2014.07.031
Porter JR, Gawith M (1999) Temperatures and the growth and development of wheat: a review. European journal of agronomy 10(1): 23-36. 10.1016/S1161-0301(98)00047-1
Sánchez-Cohen I, Delgado-Ramírez G, Esquivel-Arriaga G, Bueno-Hurtado P, Román-López A (2016) Forage water footprint in the Comarca Lagunera. In: Pérez-Espejo RH, Constantino-Toto RM, Dávila-Ibáñez HR (eds) Water, food and welfare: Water footprint as a complementary approach to water management in Mexico. Springer. pp. 199-214. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28824-6_18
Senay GB, Friedrichs M, Morton C, Parrish GE, Schauer M, Khand K, Kagone S, Boiko O, Huntington J (2022) Mapping actual evapotranspiration using Landsat for the conterminous United States: Google Earth Engine implementation and assessment of the SSEBop model. Remote Sensing of Environment 275: 113011. 10.1016/j.rse.2022.113011
Si J, Chen Y, Cheng L, Tang Z, Zhang Y (2025) The application of water footprint for assessing the crop water resources stress in Nanjing City, China. Ecological Indicators 177: 113744. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2025.113744
SIAP (2025) Anuario estadístico de la producción agrícola. Servicio de Información Agroalimentaria y Pesquera. https://nube.agricultura.gob.mx/cierre_agricola/. Fecha de consulta: 29 enero de 2026.
Sifuentes E, Macías J, Ojeda W, González VM, Salinas DA, Quintana JG (2016) Gestión del riego enfocada a variabilidad climática en el cultivo de papa: aplicación al Distrito de Riego 075, Río Fuerte, Sinaloa, México. Tecnología y Ciencias del Agua 7(2):149-168.
Smith M (1992) CROPWAT: A computer program for irrigation planning and management. FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper 46, FAO, Roma, Italia. 126p.
Steduto P, Hsiao TC, Fereres E, Raes D (2012) Crop yield response to water. FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper No.66, FAO, Roma, Italia. 503p.
Tanaka JS, Huba GJ (1989) A general coefficient of determination for covariance structure models under arbitrary GLS estimation. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology 42(2): 233-239. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8317.1989.tb00912.x
Xinchun C, Mengyang W, Rui S, La Z, Dan C, Guangcheng S, Xiangping G, Weiguang W, Shuhai T (2018) Water footprint assessment for crop production based on field measurements: A case study of irrigated paddy rice in East China. Science of the Total Environment 610-611: 84-93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.08.011
Zwart SJ,Bastiaanssen WGM (2004) Review of measured crop water productivity values for irrigated wheat, rice, cotton and maize. Agricultural Water Management 69(2): 115-133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2004.04.007
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Ecosistemas y Recursos Agropecuarios
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Aviso de copyright
Los autores que se envían a esta revista aceptan los siguientes términos:
una. Los autores conservan los derechos de autor y garantizan a la revista el derecho a ser la primera publicación del trabajo con una licencia de atribución de Creative Commons que permite a otros compartir el trabajo con un reconocimiento de la autoría del trabajo y la publicación inicial en esta revista.
B. Los autores pueden establecer acuerdos complementarios separados para la distribución no exclusiva de la versión del trabajo publicado en la revista (por ejemplo, en un repositorio institucional o publicarlo en un libro), con un reconocimiento de su publicación inicial en esta revista.
C. Se permite y se anima a los autores a difundir su trabajo electrónicamente (por ejemplo, en repositorios institucionales o en su propio sitio web) antes y durante el proceso de envío, ya que puede conducir a intercambios productivos, así como a una cita más temprana y más extensa del trabajo publicado. (Consulte El efecto del acceso abierto).
